They don't need 100% margins to come out on top if they sell more units than are stolen.
So if a shop was selling 10 units an hour and losing 1 unit an hour to theft, and footfall doubled (simplistically doubling sales and thefts), then the shop is now selling 20 units an hour and losing 2 to theft. At realistic margins, the shop is more profitable than it was.
Note that "costs associated with thefts" is not just the cost of the goods stolen. It includes the costs of security.
I also like how you think that they should be happy with your model, that how they feel about the situation is of no consequence.
They have to live with this situation; they've got skin in the game. You just post.
I wasn't discussing the article, but correcting errors in someone else's post.
I also like how you think that they should be happy with your model, that how they feel about the situation is of no consequence.
I never said what I think about the situation. I merely corrected someone else's financial misunderstanding.
They have to live with this situation; they've got skin in the game. You just post.
You're clearly angry at something. I strongly suggest you deal with this yourself, rather than continue to flail around and vent your frustration on strangers over the internet.